INTRODUCTION

The 1998 round of submissions for the Dubai International Award (DIA) for Best Practices in Improving the Living Environment has brought to the fore a noticeable and substantial improvement in the quality and depth of submissions than the first round in 1996. While this improvement is no doubt a result of the tremendous awareness-building effort undertaken by Dubai Municipality, UN-Habitat and the global network of partners of the Best Practices & Local Leadership Programme, the members of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) wish to acknowledge, first and foremost, the efforts and dedication of the people, communities and organisations whom are implementing these submissions. We concur with the opinion of the members of the 1996 TAC in "recognising the wealth of commitment and endeavour shown by so many people across the world, who are taking their destinies in their own hands to improve their and their families’ lives and the well-being of their communities."
The TAC reviewed over four hundred submissions and more than seventy updates from the 1996 round of submissions. As its first task, it set out to identify and select, among these submissions and updates, a list of approximately one hundred best practices. Its second task was to determine a short-list of not more than forty practices, of equal merit, that will go forward to the Jury. It is now the task of the Jury to select the ten award-winning Best Practices. Everyone who made a serious submission should know that the TAC considered each one carefully. Those who made submissions which were not short listed should know that the competition from around the world was intense and that all submissions satisfying the overall criteria of tangible impact, partnership and sustainability will be included on the Best Practices database for global dissemination.

The practices submitted vary considerably. Some are long-established, with an impressive record of documented results. Some are new with limited results to show to date. In assessing the merit of each submission, the TAC adopted a requirement for demonstrated performance as one of its selection criteria. It was, however, also looking for ‘pointers to the future’ - initiatives, processes and practices - which we believe will help meet the challenge of more sustainable development. In this respect, the TAC was trying to be inclusive rather than exclusive in line with one of the main aims of the Best Practices and Local Leadership Programme - that of promoting the sharing, exchange and transfer of knowledge expertise and experience.

Prior to meeting in Vienna, TAC members had the opportunity to review the submissions, on an individual basis, via the Best Practices Intranet. They had also been given an extensive briefing on the goals and objectives of the Habitat Agenda and how the work of the TAC fits in with the processes and working methods of the Best Practices and Local Leadership Programme. On the substantive side the major issues were:

• Urban poverty reduction and the creation and distribution of wealth
• Urban environment and health
• Governance and civic engagement
• Disaster preparedness, mitigation, and redevelopment
• Access to shelter, land and finance
• Status of vulnerable groups
• Gender equality and equity and social inclusion
• Use of information in decision-making

Following the detailed appraisal of the 1998 submissions the TAC identified five categories within which the submissions could be grouped. The five categories are:
1. Shelter, urban infrastructure, city-wide and neighbourhood regeneration, including access to land, finance and economic and social regeneration initiatives;
2. Sustainable human settlement development, including Local Agenda 21, production and consumption patterns, and policy and strategy development;
3. Experimental and innovative practices;
4. Governance and civic engagement;
5. Social services, including equity, social inclusion and urban safety.

These themes and categories served as the first filters to enable the TAC to see where a submission stood. Once case studies were analysed in these terms they were considered under a number of other headings. It was possible to fine-tune the appraisal of the submissions by applying the initial nomination criteria established by the United Nations and additional considerations as contained in the Dubai Declaration.

Best Practice Criteria
The Second Substantive Session of the Preparatory Committee for Habitat II met in Nairobi, Kenya, in March 1995, and adopted Decision II/7 and the following three basic criteria for nominating a Best Practice:
• Tangible impact in improving the living environment - does the practice have an impact, and one that can be measured quantitatively or qualitatively?
• Partnerships - are at least two partners involved (e.g., central and/or local government, NGOs/CBOs, the private sector, academic/training institutions, etc.)?
• Sustainability - has the practice resulted in changes in, for example, decision -making processes, resource allocation, management systems, or technology so as to sustain its initial impact?

Considerations Contained in the Dubai Declaration (1995)
In Preparation for Habitat II, Dubai Municipality hosted and co-organised with UN-Habitat the Dubai International Conference on Best Practices in November 1995. The Conference resulted in the Dubai Declaration which includes, inter alia, the following additional considerations to be used in the identification and selection of Best Practices:

• Leadership in inspiring action and change, including change in public policy
• Promotion of accountability and transparency
• Empowerment of people, neighbourhoods and communities, and incorporation of their contributions
• Acceptance of and responsiveness to social and cultural diversity
• Potential for transferability, adaptability and replicability
• Appropriateness to local conditions and levels of development
• Promotion and social equality and equity.

Additional Considerations used by the 1998 TAC:
Given the much higher quality of submissions received in 1998, the Technical Advisory Committee developed the following additional considerations for its deliberations:
• Innovativeness - is the practice a genuinely new initiative? Does it employ innovative processes, procedures, systems or technologies?
• Transferability - does the practice present actual or potential transferability elsewhere?
• Gender - Does the practice promote gender equality and equity and/or address the specific needs of women?
• Social Inclusion - does the practice promote social inclusion and integration?
• Capacity for scaling-up
• High demonstration value
• High impact in relation to resource allocation.

These themes, categories, and criteria provided a matrix to reach objective judgements on widely differing practices. Every practice submitted, from those we were not able to recommend to those which we have sent forward to the Jury has been judged by reference to the same matrix.